JimmyV
Central Connecticut
Wine Lover
Posts:4982
 | | 02/19/2005 10:25 PM |
| Randy: Regarding the examples I cited, and you criticized, I'm afraid you are way off base here. Every woman you know or have ever met has fake pearls (or diamonds) in her jewelry aresenal. As for coats made from or ringed with fake fur, millions of people, either for ethical or financial reasons, have them. Fake fur outsells real fur by an incalculable amount. People who buy such coats, hats, and gloves are not phonies or cheapskates. They are the majority of people living in cold weather climates striving to keep warm. You will never make me feel guilty for donating coats with fake fur to shelters each winter. Never. And as for fake teeth, if your option was no teeth or a full set of well-made chompers, your choice would be obvious. No one would sneer, or think lesser of you.
Conclusion: There are ample examples of fake items being useful, tasteful, and having no negative implication whatsoever. There is simply no give on this. Only the most shallow person could cast the items I have cited in a negative light. | |
Beta testing a new signature. | |
|
ChangeMe
Master of Wine
Posts:12891
| | 02/20/2005 1:56 AM |
| Quote:
Quote:
fake is negative imo, plain and simple. when i read fake my mind immediately thinks cheap and that leads to negative thoughts. everyone here can play words games all day, but at the end of the day, i would be willing to bet the farm, the average person equates fake with bad.
I think you'll lose that farm. As Mike points out above, (or, more accurately, the definitions he cites point out), the word fake is often placed before the words "fur", "pearls", and "teeth". Now in the latter two, we use "faux", and "false", but the meaning is the same. Do you think of someone with "false teeth" to be cheap? Is someone with a fake fur cheap, or are they trying to stay warm within certain ethical bounds that they have set for themselves? I'll bet my farm that your wife has fake pearl earrings and/or a necklace. Is she cheap? Are you, if you gave them to her?
Again this proves that the word fake only has negative implications if you want it to. It isn't mandated.
jimmy,
i must of missed your response to me.
that is the exact reason why the word false or faux is used, because fake has negative implications. you have actually proven my point. if fake didn't have cheap and negative implications then we WOULD call them fake teeth and fake fur.
i have never bought my wife anything "fake" and i refuse to. my wife does not have fake pearls in fact she has no pearls for that reason. sure i could buy here fake pearls but to me they would always be fake. not to sound snobbish but every diamond i buy her i personaly examine with a jewelers loop. this in lies the reason i insist on wearing a real rolex. i could buy a fake rolex with a quartz movement that would actually keep better time and look almost identical, but it would be fake and i would know it. back when i was a clothes horse i insisted on high quality genuine leather goods. sure i could buy fake gucci shoes but i always insisted on the real deal. just the kind of guy i am, i guess. that brings a question i would like to ask. using rolex for example if i said i was wearing a replica rolex submariner or wearing a fake rolex submariner, which sounds better? lets use a slight bit of common sense here people. try again and convince me fake means anything but negative.  | | | |
|
TBird
Park Slope, Brooklyn
Wine Connoisseur
Posts:5167
| | 02/20/2005 2:25 AM |
| Quote:
try again and convince me fake means anything but negative.
boobs..... | | | |
|
ChangeMe
Master of Wine
Posts:12891
| | 02/20/2005 2:31 AM |
| tbird,
i was wondering when someone was going to bring that up. 
even with these other words are used and the majority of women i know seem to think the term "fake breasts" is a negative term. when used it brings to mind strippers and pornstars (not that it is a bad thing ) but the average person thinks of strippers and pornstars in a negative way. in fact they use a big a and fancy word like augmentation to describe this procedure. | | | |
|
shaferguy91
Germantown TN
Wine Bottler
Posts:3315
| | 02/20/2005 3:02 AM |
| Quote:
tbird,
i was wondering when someone was going to bring that up.
even with these other words are used and the majority of women i know seem to think the term "fake breasts" is a negative term. when used it brings to mind strippers and pornstars (not that it is a bad thing ) but the average person thinks of strippers and pornstars in a negative way. in fact they use a big a and fancy word like augmentation to describe this procedure.
I agreed that fake is negative but this needs to end and let's go on. | | | |
|
Brian Loring
Grape Sorter
Posts:386
| | 02/20/2005 4:49 AM |
| Quote:
... but this needs to end and let's go on.
I agree. But one last observation... and something that's been (in a way) mentioned by a few people... Why not change the electronic copy to say "synthethic"? I hadn't mentioned it sooner, because I kinda thought it was obvious... and hoped it didn't require asking. | | | |
|
TBird
Park Slope, Brooklyn
Wine Connoisseur
Posts:5167
| | 02/20/2005 5:15 AM |
| "synthethic" boobs?
i guess i can live with it... | | | |
|
David Niederauer
Los Gatos, CA
Master Sommelier
Posts:15701
| | 02/20/2005 5:24 AM |
| | I like "genuine fake". | | | |
|
love_cab_chard
Master of Wine
Posts:12248
| | 02/20/2005 6:11 AM |
| anthonyiezzi: check back in the thread, WaltNYC mentioned the fact that "fake" is sometimes a good thing before TBird did & posted a link to .... "fav strip clubs"-thread. | | | |
|
Randy Wigginton
Wine Connoisseur
Posts:5359
| | 02/20/2005 3:16 PM |
| Quote:
Randy: <...> Only the most shallow person could cast the items I have cited in a negative light.
Ohh, nice shot Jimmy. So tell me, what do you really think of me? Nice way to make it personal. | | | |
|
ojeffso
warren, new jersey
Wine Lover
Posts:4877
| | 03/17/2005 7:20 PM |
| i was thinking about starting a new thread and then remembered this one. my intention is not to throw fuel on the fire, but is there a trend going on with big muscular fruit forward wines and these fake corks?
first it was my experiences with behrens and hitchcock wines over the last few years. i cannot tell you how many bad bottles i have had, especially those with any bottle age. i will never forget the 1997 napa zinfandel that smelled like paint thinner.
next was the two bottles of the 2003 ap garys pinot noir. imo both bottles were flawed (not counting llc's solo). then all the flawed lorings i am hearing about. could these corks be worse than using the real thing? could these corks be the cause of these flawed wines appearing in the market place? i really think this problem needs to be adressed. i mean, we are not dealing with $8 wines. | | | |
|
Andrew P.
Grape Fermenter
Posts:416
| | 03/17/2005 8:10 PM |
| I will re-quote myself...
Quote:
Since it is my wine we are talking about here...I thought (please let me know if it's not) worth my .03 to fill in the blanks on the use of synthetic cork in my bottles...and why I decided to use them.
Cork was out for the simple reason being...I wanted to make sure my inaugural wine was not going to be discounted as "poor wine making" if a "corked" bottle ended up in someones hands that did not have the greatest knowledge on determining corked wines. A two fold decision - on the consumer side I did not want "corked" wines going to my customers...makes for even more work on the consumer side...returning bottles, waiting, etc. - on the business side...I did not want to lose a customer over a bad bottle that I could have prevented. Add to that tiny production and cork taint rates running as high as 10%, losing 10% to cork taint did not sound good in my book.
As far as the aging...I am creating wines that I have the passion for and I enjoy to be shared with others that share that passion and enjoyment. It clearly states in my inaugural letter the potential and recommended window - "The wine is screaming “drink me now” and will drink beautifully for three to five years. " After recommendations and research, the use of Neocork fit right in with my product.
Screw cap...would love to do it (I'm all for it)...but the jury is still out over the final results of many circumstances and materials. Eventually...A.P. VIN would love to sit under a "cap".
Andrew
I will also quote a brief part of the Hogue Cellars study:
"A panel of Hogue winemakers and trade professionals tasted and analyzed a 1999 Hogue Genesis
Merlot and a 2000 Hogue Fruit Forward Chardonnay at six-month intervals for 30 months.i Each
wine was closed with natural cork, synthetic Neo cork, synthetic Supreme Corq, Stelvin screw
cap with Etain liner, and Stelvin screw cap with Saranex liner. At the conclusion of the study in
December 2003, the following results were found:
• The wines closed in natural corks showed low to medium levels of cork taint, while the
synthetic and screw cap wines showed none.
• Over time, synthetic closures began showing oxidation characteristics, leading to lower levels
of fruit aromas and taste, as well as browning in both the Merlot and Chardonnay.
• Screw cap closures maintained fruit, and the wines were considered less developed and
relatively fresh for both red and white wines.
• At both 24 and 30 months, screw caps were preferred over synthetics, which were preferred
over the natural cork.
• Screw caps and natural cork held SO2 better than the synthetic closures.
General results for the Chardonnay found that the Saranex screw cap closure was the most
preferred, with development similar to a natural cork but with no cork contamination and good
retention of fruit character. The screw cap and natural cork closures held SO2 and CO2 the best.
Wine bottled in the synthetic closures was the most oxidized after 30 months, having excessive
aged character and lowest fruit. The natural cork was the least preferred closure with high ‘corklike’
character and lower fruit.
Generally for the Merlot, wines bottled in the Saranex and Etain screw cap closures were the
most preferred wines. The Supreme Corq and Neo cork closure wines were more developed and
less reduced than the screw cap wines, and the wines closed in natural cork were the least
preferred."
You can draw MANY conclusions from this study...one being that natural cork in many categories came in last. I will also say that as far as synthetics causing "bad or "flawed" bottles in the short term...I just don't see it.
Recently...I opend a 1997 Frogs Leap zin bottled under natural cork...paint thinner would have been an up-tick for this description.
On with the thread...
Andrew | | | |
|
love_cab_chard
Master of Wine
Posts:12248
| | 03/17/2005 8:15 PM |
| In my humble, unprofessional opinion - it is a concern. Like you, ojeffso, I had my problems with B&H wines & long term cellaring. By long term, I mean 4+ years. I no longer buy B&H wines. We are talking about bottles priced $50.00-$60.00+. I can't take that chance. It's a lot of money to gamble with per bottle of wine.
Honestly, I do hesitate purchasing wines with such corks. I have no trust in those corks. And, like I mentioned in the past, my brother just does NOT purchase wines with these corks.
That being said, I do have some wines with such corks. And, most of those wines perform well. But, if I see such a cork, that bottle is gone within 2-3 years (max). I am NOT a gambler... | | | |
|
Randy Wigginton
Wine Connoisseur
Posts:5359
| | 03/17/2005 9:11 PM |
| Andrew, I flat out do not believe this study. These people started the study with a chosen result, and worked to obtain the desired result. They succeeded in validating what they wanted to believe.
If what is stated is true, then they had bad corks to start with - nothing more or less. The fact is that thousands of wines have been bottled with natural cork, yet shown NO signs of cork taint. I find it extraordinarily suspicious that ALL the bottles in this study showed low to medium levels of cork taint. Does that smell like "study taint" to you?
Cork has problems. But introducing taint to all bottles is simply unbelievable. | | | |
|
Andrew P.
Grape Fermenter
Posts:416
| | 03/17/2005 9:23 PM |
| Randy. Agreed. I might add that the ONLY reason I posted that quote was to show how much really is unknown. There is still quite a bit to learn and experiment with. One right anser is not clearly defined yet. And just another tid-bit for all those that think screw caps are the ONLY answer...just another piece of the puzzle to worry about...
leakage in Stelvin Closures?
Andrew | | | |
|
ojeffso
warren, new jersey
Wine Lover
Posts:4877
| | 03/17/2005 9:42 PM |
| | andrew-would it be feasible to try using a natural cork on some bottles to determine if there is a difference? i know plumpjack used both a natural cork and screw cap on their reserve cabs. i believe a controlled study would probably yield the best results. | | | |
|
JonesWineNo1
Sommelier
Posts:8568
| | 03/19/2005 3:30 PM |
| | The second to last Wine Spectator had a number of excellent articles on the question of closures. People should read those articles and draw their own conclusions. | | | |
|
AlexRed
Northern VA
Barrel Filler
Posts:1335
| | 03/22/2005 4:46 PM |
| | for those who maintain that cork allows ever so slight "breathing" over time that aids in "aging as we know it" that synthetic closures and Screw caps can't replicate.... what do you think about wines that have wax covering the Cork? while maintaining cork-on-wine contact (in lieu of plastic or metal-on-wine contact) it would eliminate all air transfer, no? | | | |
|
EricLundblad
Grape Fermenter
Posts:557
| | 03/22/2005 6:32 PM |
| | No, both types of wax used allow air through. So assuming corks breathe, corks with wax will too. | |
Ladd Cellars | |
|
Winetex
Austin, Texas
Master of Wine
Posts:10373
| | 05/11/2008 5:20 PM |
| | Bump, just for fun. As Jimmyv notes in the other thread it is interesting how this turned out years later. | | | |
|